Finding Wisdom in the Wreckage ( Now is the Republican's Time to Learn)

The American Thinker ^ | 11/09/2006 | J. Peter Mulhern

[Kenny Bunk]

provided, of course, the Republicans get sensible candidates.

The RNC absolutely torpedoed two good candidates ... Harris in GFL, and Graf in AZ. Before we go into any more elections, we had better clean out the RNC.

BTW, Bush was very good at dealing with the opposition as a Governor. Soooo.....?

[RichInOC]

Finding Wisdom in the Wreckage

"With all this horses**t, there's got to be a pony in here somewhere!"

[IamConservative]

They simply matched our candidate with one who was ideologically equal or better

Corker in Tennessee was the only candidate I heard call this out about Ford. Something to the effect of "how hard it must be for Ford to get up everyday pretend to be me."

[George W. Bush]

Democrats didn’t deserve to win, but Republicans deserved to lose. The voters plainly got that right. ... Voters didn’t like events in Iraq two years ago and they put President Bush on probation. They gave him a dangerously narrow reelection victory against an inept candidate with a long history of anti-American activism, a figure who should have been buried under a landslide that would make 1972 look like a squeaker. Two years later nothing had changed except that the voters were out of patience.

Truth.

[George W. Bush]

Gridlock is the best thing that could have happened to us these last 2 'lame duck' years of this bleeding heart's administration as he's hell-bent on driving us more than $10 TRILLION DOLLARS into debt!

And Nancy Pelosi would love to help him do it.

[Sunsong]

Don't agree with much in this analysis - but at least he is thinking and expressing new ideas. Iraq is a big mess and the electorate wants it solved and our troops out of harm's way. That much we know.

Time for the GOP to come up with some new ideas and clean up their act on character and integrity.

[ComancheCounty]

"Bush was very good at dealing with the opposition as a Governor"


... he was dealing with the remnants of the old Solid South conservative democrats here in Texas, not the San Fran variety controlling Washington.

I think you deal with them with garlic and a cross, not compromise

[SirLinksalot]

OK, let's talk abiout IRAQ.

The main thing we all agree with is we will leave when the mission is accomplished.

HOW DO YOU DEFINE THE MISSION ACCOMPLISHED ?

The problem as I see it is Bush keeps repeating this line without giving anyone an indication as to what state the country has to be in before we consider it stable.

Why can't we for instance give people a clear description of what Iraq should be like before we consider withdrawal ?

If they say have close to 400,000 in their army and 100,000 civilian police in Baghdad, would that be considered a good indicator that we can leave ?

To what level should we consider their army trained enough so that we can leave them to be able to defend themselves ?

THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS AMERICANS WANT ANSWERS TO. Unfortunately, Bush isn't doing a very good job communicating. Saying we will leave when the job is done is too vague, too general to give anyone solace.

As for the Dems, they're worse. All they're doing is giving the signal that they want to leave ASAP, leaving the country alone to fend for itself. Charles Rangel even threatens to withhold funds from Iraq leaving it similar to South Vietnam was in 1974.

So, to Bush --- TALK TO THE PEOPLE AND PLEASE BE MORE SPECIFIC ABOUT YOUR PLANS. Don't give us generalities and vague apropisms that will leave us trying to parse and dissect what you mean.

[Blind Eye Jones]

I disagree with the assessment in great parts. The real war was fought where it should have been: on the home-front. The Dems were obstructionists who used the wars for political purposes. With their enablers, the MSM, they convinced the American public that the US was incompetent, losing and suffering terrible casualties -- which is ridiculous compared to other wars. The MSM framed the public perspective and the Republicans never went on the attack, partially due to confidence in their numbers, their sense of magnanimity toward the Dems, and G W Bush for his compassion and attempts to heal the partisan divides that went back to Clinton. The Dems never respected his gestures and made matter worse through lying, leaking, scandals and court room antics. Politics is a bloody sport and Bush refuses to see that aspect -- it may be his great conceit that they are so desperate to be rid of him but he can still win them over -- and it has cost him his base. His refusal to fight back -- for example, to clean house with the CIA, prosecute the NYTs, show evidence of WMD, etc. -- and concessions to the Dems (immigration) were meaningless. The few times he did fight back were too late, and the MSM just kept pounding away as he kept joking with them in the press room. I think he overestimated the power that he had at home with Congress and felt that such great power toward the Dems should not be abused in petty squabbling. That, and the effectiveness of MSM in framing the anti Iraq, anti Bush debate, led to the current situation. If Bush learns one thing, it is that he has to fight at home, deal with the MSM as allies to the Dems who will have no more moral compunction than they.

[4Freedom]

This is going to be some kind of record.

The federal portion of our National Debt is going to come near to doubling with a Republican president in office.

Read a Republican Party Platform from just a couple of decades ago and compare it to the Republican Party Platform of today.

The RNC is having an identity crisis and then they wonder why they lost.

[SirLinksalot]

Blind Eye Jones

Your assessment is part of the problem. But I already said that in the previous post -- Bush is a very poor communicator.

But more importantly, it is this -- Americans do not want to continue seeing soldiers dying without any being given ANY report that progress is going on.

And we HAVE TO DEFINE what progress is.

As the public sees it now, all they see are bombs exploding, over a hundred soldiers dying in a month, a civil war brewing, and NO DEFINITION OF HOW WE DEFINE THE JOB ACCOMPLISHED.

I have seen a lot of conservatives turned off by this. No matter how you support the war, people don't want to see our men dying for nothing.

[hosepipe]

[ But this time, it's a lot more serious because we are in a World-Wide War our leaders were afraid to spell out. Finally we can join the chorus: "It's Bush's Fault." ]

Good analysis... WORSE....
Bush actually looks like Alfred E. Nueman..
America has become a Madd Madd place because of it..

Somebody someplace is laughing at us.. Can you hear them?...

[Sunsong]

So, to Bush --- TALK TO THE PEOPLE AND PLEASE BE MORE SPECIFIC ABOUT YOUR PLANS. Don't give us generalities and vague apropisms that will leave us trying to parse and dissect what you mean.

Thanks for your post. Yes, I agree, President Bush has been much to vague and I really think that no one truly understood the nature of the mind set over there - the cultural memes. Freedom resonates with the Kurds and some of the Sunnis - not much with the Shia. It would have been better to respect the reality of where the Iraqis were in terms beliefs and attitudes instead of assuming that they wanted what we want.

I like what Jonah Goldberg suggested: make the Iraqis vote: do they want us to stay or to leave? If they vote that they want us out - we can set a date and request certain criteria be met by that date. If they vote that they want us to stay - that would help with the American people and we could then let the Iraqis know what we expect.

There is so much corruption over there that needs to be addressed. The Iraqis should be making billions in oil revenue - and having some money and some job prospects would make a lot of difference. People want meaningful work.

One thing that is helpful is that the Iraqis do love their children and care about their families [unlike the Palestinians]. That is something that we can work with - helping people to help themselves in terms of prosperity and meaningful work.

GW says that he has military, politcal and economic objectives that have to be met before we leave. As you say, they need to be clearly communicated [as best as GW can articulate :-) ] Tony Snow could help a lot.

And I think we have to be realistic. The Sunnis and the Shia hate each other. The Brits were so wrong to draw up the country of Iraq in the first place. The Kurds can do well on their own and we need to be honorable in making sure they are protected. If we can figure out what to do with Baghdad - having loosely autonomous states within a federal system in which each state is safe and protected makes quite a bit of sense.

When we leave - we need to leave a place that is not going to be a breeding ground for terrorists and is better than what was there when we invaded. We don't need to set our goals unrealistically high.

[Kenny Bunk]

In re World-Wide War: When old Newt Gingrich, of whom I have never been overly fond, came out a few months ago and spelled it out for the most benighted amongst us, he was shut down faster than a whorehouse next to a church.

For a moment there, I had hopes that they would un-muzzle him. Why the hell are Republicans afraid to just say that "Islam is not the highjacked religion of peace? It is the creed of highjackers. We need to whack'em right now. They need it every few hundred years and it's just our turn."

"Folks, if we're dead, nothing much else matters, does it? Hold your nose. Vote for us and we'll handle it." Even Ed Koch had that figured out and we let him down.

[Kenny Bunk]

There was no evidence prior to this election that Republican turnout could be beaten.

Come on, LS, the base was leaving tracks like Bigfoot! The Republicans were not killed. It was clearly suicide.

[Sam Cree]

food for thought

[Kenny Bunk]

And I think we have to be realistic. The Sunnis and the Shia hate each other. The Brits were so wrong to draw up the country of Iraq in the first place. The Kurds can do well on their own and we need to be honorable in making sure they are protected. If we can figure out what to do with Baghdad - having loosely autonomous states within a federal system in which each state is safe and protected makes quite a bit of sense.

This advice was given to Bush I. It was also given to Bush II. The Prevailing theory was that we needed a unified and strong Iraq to counterbalance Iran.

Remember, when he was killing Iranians,
Saddam Hussein was our pal.

[George W. Bush]

The federal portion of our National Debt is going to come near to doubling with a Republican Texan president in office.

There, that's actually more accurate.

The Republican Party in Texas is quite conservative. But Texas is not actually a conservative state. Hence, Bush sent Rove out to torpedo the conservative Republicans on the Texas state board of education. And he refused even to be seen with the Texas GOP at their conventions.

Why? Because they're conservative. And he's the Second Coming Of LBJ.

No mystery about it. It never made us popular but a lot of us have said this consistently since Bush first ran. Sadly, we've been proven right repeatedly. We'd rather have been wrong about it.

Compassionate conservative = big spender from Texas.

[Sunsong]

This advice was given to Bush I. It was also given to Bush II. The Prevailing theory was that we needed a unified and strong Iraq to counterbalance Iran.

It is far past time to take the advice - a unified Iraq is not realistic. We need to respect the mid set of the Iraqis and NOT expect them to want to be like us.

[Kenny Bunk]

Ricochet Ping: from George W. Bush

The federal portion of our National Debt is going to come near to doubling with a Republican Texan president in office.

There, that's actually more accurate.

The Republican Party in Texas is quite conservative. But Texas is not actually a conservative state. Hence, Bush sent Rove out to torpedo the conservative Republicans on the Texas state board of education. And he refused even to be seen with the Texas GOP at their conventions.

Why? Because they're conservative. And he's the Second Coming Of LBJ.

No mystery about it. It never made us popular but a lot of us have said this consistently since Bush first ran. Sadly, we've been proven right repeatedly. We'd rather have been wrong about it.

Compassionate conservative = big spender from Texas.